Lawmakers yesterday removed a licensing requirement for mixed-status couples who purchase land.Government described the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment Act 2013 as “housekeeping” measures. But the Opposition Progressive Labour Party — which had imposed the restrictions when in Government — opposed the move, citing the need to preserve property rights for Bermudians, lambasting Government for not providing relevant data to the House of Assembly and questioning what measures will be in place to prevent the practice of fronting.Introduced by Public Safety Minister Michael Dunkley on behalf of Home Affairs Minister Senator Fahy, the changes repealed controversial provisions forcing married couples in which one person is a non-Bermudian to get a licence before purchasing land.“In practice, married couples, where one spouse is a Bermudian, will simply be allowed to acquire property in accordance with the rules and regulations that pertain to a Bermudian with no added regulatory requirements,” said Mr Dunkley.Much of the debate centred around the rationale and history of the licensing requirement. Opposition MPs led by Shadow Home Affairs Minister Walter Roban explained that the PLP had first introduced land licensing requirements for mixed-status couples in 2007 to combat the practice of “fronting” — where a Bermudian would stand in as the owner of a property for a non-Bermudian — and because it was unclear how much land was in the hands of non-Bermudians.The 2007 law proved controversial and sparked intense lobbying with opponents claiming it discriminated against Bermudians simply because of the status of their spouse. In 2012, the measure was amended to exempt a couple’s first land purchase from the licence requirement.But Mr Dunkley told the House that the law simply deterred property purchases and created an administrative burden.“With the elimination of the requirement to acquire a license for a first property the opportunity to monitor land held by restricted persons using the licensing regime is greatly diminished,” said Mr Dunkley.“The estimated number of licences ever issued for the purchase of a second or third property under the regime is in the region of three.”He added that in the event of death or divorce of the Bermudian spouse the law already provides for the non-Bermudian to obtain a licence to hold land.“Protecting the rights of Bermudians are paramount when it comes to land,” Mr Roban.He added: “ Any Bermuda Government has a duty to protect the property rights of Bermudians now and Bermudians yet to be born.”And he said that non Bermudian spouses can apply for status after ten years of marriage in any case — a period in which they are unlikely to have paid for their first property.He said the law limits non Bermudian held land to 400 acres per parish and that it was important to know how much land is currently in non Bermudians hands.Public Works Minister Trevor Moniz said the practice of fronting had been rampant before the 2007 legislation and that some companies continued the practice today.But he warned against an “us and them” paradigm and defended the new legislation as part of an effort to boost confidence in the community.“We’re trying to do a number of things to stimulate this economy to stimulate the confidence of Bermudians and non-Bermudians. We’re trying to stimulate inward capital investment and the investment of people in this community who have money. We’re trying to open up the economy and we don’t want people to be frightened by that.”Deputy Opposition Leader Derrick Burgess reminded the House that in 2007, 37 percent of land was owned by non-Bermudians. “We should have had the figures presented to this House today on what percentage of residential property is owned by non-Bermudians, how many non-Bermudians are married to Bermudians at this point, how many non-Bermudians own property,” said Mr Burgess. “These figures would have been most helpful to us.”He warned against “opening the floodgates” without having the data and called on the Government to rise and report progress.Shadow Education Minister Walton Brown rejected the measures saying it was “aided and abetted by the real estate community” and not sensitive to the needs of the vulnerable.“This particular piece of legislation will further marginalise those who are more financially challenged,” he said.“Those who have will get more. Those who find challenges in this current marketplace will continue to see those challenges in place.”And he noted that the bill could be “effectively illegal” given that the data on non-Bermudian held land was not clear.“We cannot make effective policy in the absence of good data. How do you make policy without knowing what the facts are. Simply being lobbied by the real estate community is not sufficient justification for passing this bill.”Mr Brown rejected what he said were calls by the real estate community to bring prices back to the “unsustainable” levels of 2007.“Who loses in that, Mr Speaker? The average working Bermudian.”He said: “I go back to my parents. In 1972, a bartender and a waitress were able to buy a home in this country. What bartender and what waitress today can afford to buy a home in this country?”Mr Brown continued: “If all you’re going to do is bring forward legislation to benefit the rich, to benefit those who are your strangest lobbyist, then you’ve shirked the responsibility that was given to you on December 17.”